Today, Sidney Powell has filed a Motion To Produce Newly Discovered Brady Evidence on behalf of Michael Flynn. Powell requested the legacy Team Mueller prosecutors for this newly discovered evidence on October 11, 2019, and was told, basically, don't call us, we'll call you--if WE think you should have it, we'll give it to you. Not good enough, said Powell, and filed a motion.
Here's what's so fascinating about this. Powell describes the evidence--two Blackberry devices that were utilized by Joseph Mifsud--as "newly discovered", as in: "evidence that has only recently come into [the government's] possession." Huh? The government only recently came into the possession of Blackberries that were used by Joseph Mifsud?
Here's what I think is going on.
Joseph Mifsud is a long running asset of Western intelligence services, working for MI6, the Italians, the CIA, and from time to time the FBI. We know that the FBI opened a Full CI investigation on Flynn as far back as 2014, and we're pretty darned sure that Mifsud was part of that investigation. Therefore, my guess--and I think I'm right--is that the FBI provided Mifsud with these Blackberry devices for use when he was working for the FBI, targeting Flynn and, later, Papadopoulos and, maybe, Carter Page outside the Continental US, i.e., in the UK. In other words, when Mifsud was engaged in "OCONUS lures," as famously stated in the Strzok/Page texts. That's pretty clearly what Powell thinks, since she writes this in her motion (pay attention to the highlighted portions):
Filing on the newly discovered evidence:— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) October 15, 2019
The 2 phones were used by Mifsud as part of the efforts by western intelligence against him "likely as early as 2014 to arrange . . . 'connections' with certain Russians" pic.twitter.com/ZMDAXB1Ytm
Sounds like Barr and Durham was given his phone during their recent trip to Italy.— Mark Hilgers (@hilgers_mark) October 15, 2019
The only reason I can think of why van Grack didn't move to dismiss this case months ago is because ... well, how do you dismiss a case in which you've extracted a guilty plea without admitting misconduct on your own part? And also this: Maybe, just maybe, van Grack is desperately protecting other bad actors, with whom he might be considered a co-conspirator.
OK, now put all that in the context of Impeachment Theater. If, at some point in the next few months, the case against Flynn gets tossed for prosecutorial misconduct, how will that make impeachment look? I think the general public will see the connection, will put 2 + 2 together and come up with the right answer.
All this has to be very worrying for the Dems and for the Deep State.